News behind the news. This picture is me (white spot) standing on the bridge connecting European and North American tectonic plates. It is located in the Reykjanes area of Iceland. By-the-way, this is a color picture.

Monthly Archives: September 2010

Post navigation

This article is based on a story posted at CBN.com. The article states that scientists have found a direct link to show that Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is genetic. A study shows that:

“Children with ADHD are twice as likely to have missing or extra chromosomes, according to the study published Thursday in the medical journal The Lancet.”

The article points out that:

“ADHD is one of the most common child mental disorders and is estimated to affect around 3 to 5 percent of children globally.”

So where is the hope? I personally do not understand the difference between Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) and Attention Deficity Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), but I have some hope for parents of children with ADD. There is a book entitled, “Driven to Distraction: Recognizing and Coping With Attention Deficit Disorder from Childhood through Adulthood” by Edward M. Hallowell, M. D. and John J. Ratey, M. D. As someone who is married to a person I consider the poster child for ADD, I love this book. Both the authors have ADD and the book has a lot of examples of simple things you can do as a person with ADD or the parent of a child with ADD that make life run more smoothly. The book is available at Amazon.com. I strongly recommend it. It gave me hope to know that two men with ADD could successfully get through medical school and become doctors. My husband is a successful computer person. I would also like to add that one of my daughters has ADD and is a successful electrical engineer. ADD seems to work differently in girls than boys, but I can say without a doubt that every child I have met with ADD is a bright child. We just need to learn to help them deal with their uniqueness. I am currently watching that process with one of my grandchildren. In my family ADD evidently is genetic.

This story is based on an article at Politico on Tuesday. The article reports that:

“The must-pass spending bill pending in the Senate includes a little-noticed provision that would pay the family of the late Sen. Robert C. Byrd for the salary he would have commanded in the next fiscal year.”

According to the Senate handbook:

“…upon the death of a senator who had been serving in office, “in the next appropriations bill, an item will be inserted for a gratuity to be paid to the widow(er) or other next- of-kin, in the amount of one-year’s compensation.””

According to the bill, the late senator’s $193,400 salary to be split equally between Byrd’s seven children and grandchildren. I object. Senator Byrd was not a young man; he did not leave behind a young widow with young children who would struggle financially–he left adult children and grandchildren. American military killed in action don’t get this sort of benefits.

The article further explains:

“The practice has been long followed by both parties and in both chambers, including in 2007 when the widows of the late Wyoming GOP Sen. Craig Thomas and the late Rep. Paul Gillmor (R-Ohio) each received $165,200 for the salary that the two men would have received.”

This is ridiculous. The political club that is Congress needs to be broken up and its rules changed. This is the year to do that.

This story is based on two articles. The first article is from today’s Wall Street Journal and states that “a senior McDonald’s official informed the Department of Health and Human Services that the restaurant chain’s insurer won’t meet a 2011 requirement to spend at least 80% to 85% of its premium revenue on medical care.” The second article is from Yahoo News and states that McDonalds is denying reports that it is considering dropping health care coverage for some employees because they won’t meet the government requirements for spending on medical care.

The article at Yahoo News points out:

“The world’s largest hamburger chain provides its hourly workers with low-cost plans known as “mini-meds” or limited benefits plans. These plans typically cover things like doctor’s office visits and prescription drugs. But they don’t provide comprehensive coverage, and they often come with a cap on how much the insurer pays in annual benefits that is much lower than a major medical insurance plan.”

First of all, I commend McDonalds for offering any medical insurance to its hourly employees. A lot of companies can’t afford to do that or simply don’t do that. It would be interesting to know how many hours a week an employee has to work to obtain the insurance.

This situation shows one of the unintended (or possibly intended) consequences of Obamacare. We need to remember that corporations are in business to make money. There is no crime in that and it is not illegal. Many corporations like McDonalds donate large amounts to charities–McDonalds is the main contributor to the Ronald McDonald House. If a company wants to stay in business, it has to protect its bottom line. If the fine for not providing health insurance is considerably lower than the cost of providing it, corporations are not going to provide health insurance. That is going to force more people into government healthcare and eventually eliminate private healthcare.

The only way to stop this runaway train is to vote Republican in November–and to hold the Republicans’ feet to the fire in terms of REPEAL AND REPLACE. It is quite possible that Obamacare cannot be repealed under President Obama, but it can be defunded and essentially stopped in its tracks. A vote for any Democrat is a vote for Senator Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Because Congress has gone home to campaign rather than vote to extend any of the ‘Bush Tax Cuts’, we are facing the largest tax increase in American history on January 1st–plus any additional taxes recommended by the deficit panel that reports to Congress and the President after the election. Either tax increase (or both) will send this country into a recession. If you think the economy is bad now, vote Democrat in November, if the Democrats win, this past year will look like a booming economy.

Well, some of the talk show hosts have been asking listeners to send in idea as to what the Democrats would do as an October surprise to cut their election loses. Well, the first October surprise arrived today–but it is confusing and not really relevant to anything. C’mon guys, you can do better than this!

Hot Air is reporting today that Gloria Allred held a press conference today to accuse Meg Whitman of having an illegal household worker for nine years. Gloria Allred is claiming that Ms. Whitman knew the woman was an illegal alien, Meg Whitman claims that she had all of the documentation to prove the woman was here legally and had the right to work. The household worker said she was fired when she went to the Whitmans and told them she was illegal and asked for help to become legal.

This attempt to influence to California governor’s election totally confuses me. First of all, in case you have forgotten, Gloria Allred was the person who was talking to the press about sexual harrassment suits against Arnold Schwarzenegger just before his election as governor. Those suits never resulted in any charges being proven. She also accused Schwarzenegger of being a Nazi sympathizer just before the election. Hmmm. Do I sense a pattern here?

The situation Meg Whitman was put in by this household worker was a no-win situation. This person had been a member of her household staff for nine years when Ms. Whitman found out the person was illegal. What was she supposed to do? I can’t figure out if the Democrats are trying to say that she is a horrible person because an illegal alien worked for her or if she is a horrible person because she fired the illegal alien. Actually, I don’t think either one works.

This is a totally dumb October surprise. It doesn’t even qualify as a good personal attack. I really hope that the Democrats are losing their touch and will be forced to discuss issues rather than personally attack people..

“Harvard Pilgrim Health Care has notified customers that it will drop its Medicare Advantage health insurance program at the end of the year, forcing 22,000 senior citizens in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Maine to seek alternative supplemental coverage.”

This is not speculation–this is fact.

Boston.com reports:

“Harvard Pilgrim in a second mailing this week will urge customers to switch to a new Medicare Supplement plan it will begin offering in October. Unlike Medicare Advantage, which is overseen by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the new Harvard Pilgrim plan will be overseen by the Massachusetts Division of Insurance.

“It will be “slightly more expensive” than the Medicare Advantage plans, but competitive with supplemental insurance plans offered by rivals such as Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts, the state’s largest health insurer, Bowman said.

“She said the Medicare Supplement plan will feature some benefits not covered by the current plan, such as fitness reimbursements, but won’t pay for prescription drugs, which are covered by some versions of the current plan. Instead, seniors can buy separate supplemental drug coverage through a partnership with Coventry Health Care, in Bethesda, Md.”

So let’s look at the promises broken–Medicare Advantage is no longer available in three New England states. Rates for the elderly will be going up in their new plans and they will have to pay extra on top of that for drug coverage. THIS IS NOT AN IMPROVEMENT!!!!

If you are tired of being lied to, vote Republican in November. Do not send the people who jammed Obamacare into law while ignoring the wishes of the American people back to Congress. It is definitely time for REPEAL AND REPLACE. The only way to do that is to elect a Republican Congress. I want Medicare Advantage to be there when I need it. It is by far the most successful (and lowest cost) healthcare program for seniors.

This story is based on an article by Ed Morrissey posted at Hot Air yesterday. It’s not really news that the standards desired by the extreme elements of the environmental movement on greenhouse gas emissions will seriously hurt American industry, but did you know that stricter standards here will actually increase world-wide emissions. Huh? Yes, you read that right. Let me explain.

The article at Hot Air starts out by explaining that the minority on the the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) is not the only group that fears the loss of nearly a million jobs from new EPA rules on greenhouse gases and other emissions issues. The EPW was expected to release a report yesterday detailing the economic damage that an activist EPA will do to the American economy.

The article lists the jobs that will be lost and states that factories and other facilities will have to close when their boilers do not meet the new standard. Jobs will be lost in those factories and in thier supply chains, putting financial strain on the communities where these plants are located.

The article concludes:

“Again, no facility in the US meets the standards proposed by the EPA. Imposition of these standards would at least temporarily close almost 20 percent of all American cement producers and reduce long-term cement production from 8-15%. The cement that will be needed for construction demand will have to be imported, primarily from China, which is expanding their cement production using environmental standards significantly below current American standards. In other words, we can expect more pollution, not less — just outsourced along with the jobs in the industry.”

We need to elect a Congress that will move toward environmentalism in a balanced manner. It does not do anyone any good for America to lose jobs in order to cut greenhouse gas emissions and then directly contribute to an increase in greenhouse gases elsewhere.

Anyone who supports a Democrat in the upcoming November election is voting for Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to do more of the same. Even if you elect a conservative Democrat, if he votes for Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid as leaders, nothing will change.

This article has a number of sources, the main ones are the Washington Examiner on September 26th, Fox News on September 25th, and the American Thinker on September 26th. The story deals with voter fraud found in Houston, Texas.

On Friday, August 27th, a warehouse fire destroyed nearly all of Harris County’s 10,000 electronic voting machines. Harris County Tax Assessor Collector [and voter registrar] Leo Vasquez has accused an ACORN-like organization called “Houston Votes” of submitting thousands of bogus voter registration applications in recent months in what he said appears to be a campaign to taint the voter rolls.

This is the time line of the events:

According to the American Thinker:

“A group of people took it upon themselves to work at polling places in 2008 and observed – and were shocked – by what they perceived to be voter fraud. Their next step was to create a citizen-based grassroots group to collect publicly available voting data and analyze what they found (with the help of donated computers and volunteer helpers). They admit they did not know what they were doing at first but where there is a will there is a way.”

Fox News tells what happened next:

“”The first thing we started to do was look at houses with more than six voters in them” Engelbrecht said, because those houses were the most likely to have fraudulent registrations attached to them. “Most voting districts had 1,800 if they were Republican and 2,400 of these houses if they were Democratic . . .

“”But we came across one with 24,000, and that was where we started looking.”

“Vacant lots had several voters registered on them. An eight-bed halfway house had more than 40 voters registered at its address,” Engelbrecht said. “We then decided to look at who was registering the voters.”

“Their work paid off. Two weeks ago the Harris County voter registrar took their work and the findings of his own investigation and handed them over to both the Texas secretary of state’s office and the Harris County district attorney.

“Most of the findings focused on a group called Houston Votes, a voter registration group headed by Sean Caddle, who formerly worked for the Service Employees International Union. Among the findings were that only 1,793 of the 25,000 registrations the group submitted appeared to be valid. The other registrations included one of a woman who registered six times in the same day; registrations of non-citizens; so many applications from one Houston Voters collector in one day that it was deemed to be beyond human capability; and 1,597 registrations that named the same person multiple times, often with different signatures.”

Twenty five thousand illegal votes is a serious matter. The connection with someone who formerly worked for the SEIU is very interesting. Meanwhile, the people in charge of voting in Houston have to find a way to make sure every legal vote is counted in November.

Honest elections depend on the integrity of the Secretary of State in the state involved. We need to pay attention to whom we vote for in all offices in November, but particularly to make sure that voters in every state elect a Secretary of State who is honest.

Yesterday Betsy McCaughey posted an article at the New York Post about the redistribution of health resources under Obamacare. Ms. McCaughey points out that the government projections on the cost of Obamacare through 2019 show that employers and consumers will pay higher health insurance premiums than if Obamacare had not been passed.

The article points out:

“In 2014, a staggering 85.2 million people — 31 percent of all nonelderly Americans — will be on Medicaid and CHIP (the Medicaid-like children’s health program). This accounts for the majority of those who’d gain health coverage. Amazingly, only 3 percent more people will have private insurance.”

Obamacare loosens the requirements for Medicaid, pushing more people into government-paid healthcare–increasing the welfare-state mentality.

The article further states:

“In 2014, a staggering 85.2 million people — 31 percent of all nonelderly Americans — will be on Medicaid and CHIP (the Medicaid-like children’s health program). This accounts for the majority of those who’d gain health coverage. Amazingly, only 3 percent more people will have private insurance.”

The result of this is the trampling of two basic American ideals–our basic work ethic and our committment to the people who raised us.

Ms. McCaughey concludes:

“Higher premiums are bad enough, but to see the older generation victimized in order to expand a welfare culture is a total reversal of American values.”

I have one more thought. Nancy Pelosi made a big deal about the fact that children can now be covered under their parents’ health insurance until age 26. She has said, “We see it as an entrepreneurial bill, a bill that says to someone, if you want to be creative and be a musician or whatever, you can leave your work, focus on your talent, your skill, your passion, your aspirations because you will have health care.”Maybe I am terribly old-fashioned, but I wanted to encourage my children to be out of the house and working at age 26. If one of my children wanted to be an artisit or a musician, I would encourage them to do it while actually working for a living. It seems to me that we have delayed the end of adolescence almost indefinitely already, and this bill continues the trend of not encouraging people to grow up and take responsibility for their own lives. This is another step toward the nanny state. The nanny state is not compatible with freedom. We need to remember that.

Hot Air posted a story on Sunday about the United Nations’ appointment of Mazlan Othman, an obscure Malaysian astrophysicist, to act as Earth’s first contact for any aliens that may come visiting. Ms. Othman is the head of the UN’s Office for Outer Space Affairs (Unoosa),

The article states:

“Professor Richard Crowther, an expert in space law and governance at the UK Space Agency and who leads British delegations to the UN on such matters, said: “Othman is absolutely the nearest thing we have to a ‘take me to your leader’ person.””

I suppose we have to be ready for a “Mars Attacks” moment, but I wonder how much US taxpayer money this is costing. Any alien that lands on earth is scientifically ahead of any nation on earth and should be treated with extreme respect regardless of whom they encounter (keeping in mind that if they have the technology to get here, they probably have the technology to do some serious damage here).

However, I really question how the United Nations spends its time and its money. Please follow the link and read the article at Hot Air. There are some interesting concluding thoughts.

This article is based on a story posted at BigGovernment.com posted yesterday. I don’t need to comment–I just want to post the quotes listed. The quotes are from a panel discussion–Which Way for the Working Class? Elections 2010 and Beyond–Friday afternoon in New York City.

More than 400 people attended the event at the Great Hall at Cooper Union. These are the quotes:

“(AFL-CIO President Richard) Trumka said it is vital to channel working-class anger away from Fox News and Tea Party extremists who are delivering

a cynical, deeply dishonest and incoherent message–that big government is somehow to blame for the current crisis that the budget deficit will eat our children, and that illegal immigrants took all the good jobs.

However, he added, “The good news is they haven’t bought into right-wing ideology. They are just confused about who to blame.” But:

We have to offer working people something other than the dead-end choice between the failed agenda of greed and the voices of hate and division and violence.

…In the short term, said Trumka, the labor movement has to “recapture the moment and take control of the national conversation.” Building for the future,

we need to fundamentally restructure our economy and re-establish popular control over the private corporations which have distorted our economy and hijacked our government. That’s a long-term job, but one we should start now.”

On June 23rd I posted an article (rightwinggranny.com) about the arrest in Dearborn, Michigan, of four people charged with disorderly conduct because they were handing out copies of the Gospel of John outside an Arab cultural festival. They were not inside the festival, nor were they causing a disturbance. There is a video of the incident at Power Line.

John Hinderaker at Power Line posted an article yesterday to update the story. According to the article:

“Much to the barely concealed chagrin of the Detroit Free Press, the Christian evangelists who were arrested for distributing St. John’s gospel on a public street outside an Arab festival in Dearborn, Michigan, a few months back have been found not guilty of breaching the peace. One of the four defendants was apparently found guilty of the less serious offense of failing to obey a police officer’s order.”

Mr. Hinderaker points out:

“The policeman’s order violated the First Amendment, so that conviction should be subject to reversal. It is good that a Michigan jury didn’t buy this plainly unconstitutional prosecution, but the story, taken as a whole, is sobering. These evangelists incurred expenses that must have been well into five figures, at a bare minimum, and on top of that had a legitimate fear of criminal conviction–all for engaging in activity that falls within the heart of the First Amendment’s protection.”

The Detroit Free Press had a different take on the situation:

“”It’s really about a hatred of Muslims,” [Dearborn Mayor Jack] O’Reilly said. “That is what the whole heart of this is. … Their idea is that there is no place for Muslims in America. They fail to understand the Constitution.””

I’m not a lawyer, but I thought the First Amendment protected the rights of all religions–not just Islam. The fact that these four people were even charged with anything is chilling. Why didn’t the police respect their rights?

I spent Saturday at the Celebrate Holliston 2010 Day Parade and field day. I was part of a group of supporters of Marty Lamb for Congress (to represent the Massachusetts 3rd Congressional District).

I am supporting Marty Lamb because of his experience as a business owner and his belief in smaller government and lower taxes. Marty Lamb‘s website gives details about his ideas and the changes he would support to make Washington more accountable to the voters. One of the things I appreciate about Marty is his willingness to state specifically his solutions to the various problems we face as a state and a country.

Marty Lamb is running against Jim McGovern. Congressman McGovern has a ZERO rating from both Americans for Tax Reform and Americans for Prosperity. Congressman McGovern has a 100% rating from the American Immigration Lawyers Association and the American Bar Association. The U. S. Chamber of Commerce gives him a 35% rating. I believe the voters in the Third District of Massachusetts deserve better than that.

Yesterday’s UK Telegraph posted an article by James Delingpole reporting on a strange agenda item on the Bilderberg’s meeting in Spain in June. Don’t roll your eyes just yet–this isn’t an article about a one-world government conspiracy.

Well, guys, which is it? Are we threatened by global warming, global cooling, or just general cyclical climate changes?

The article points out:

“The next few years are going to be very interesting. Watch the global power elite squirming to reposition itself as it slowly distances itself from Anthropogenic Global Warming (“Who? Us? No. We never thought of it as more than a quaint theory…”), and tries to find new ways of justifying green taxation and control. (Ocean acidification; biodiversity; et al). You’ll notice sly shifts in policy spin. In Britain, for example, Chris “Chicken Little” Huhne’s suicidal “dash for wind” will be re-invented as a vital step towards “energy security.” There will be less talk of “combatting climate change” and more talk of “mitigation”. You’ll hear enviro-Nazis like Obama’s Science Czar John Holdren avoid reference to “global warming” like the plague, preferring the more reliably vague phrase “global climate disruption.””

The global warming movement has never been about climate–it’s about money and power. When you look into the financing of the ‘carbon credit’ companies you find the names of Senators and people in public office who will make a lot of money if these ideas take root. It is time to question anyone who supports extreme measures in the name of saving the earth. We need to be protective of our environment, but we need to consider the needs of civilization also.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is my candidate for the chutzpah award of 2010. The Imam has stated that we must build the mosque at Ground Zero in order to prevent an attack similar the one that occurred on September 11th. He stated in an interview on “60 Minutes” last night, “We have to wage peace.”

“Saying that the “campaign for winning hearts and minds is an important part” of any military fight against radical extremists from his faith, Rauf said he was “ready willing and able to serve our country and serve our faith tradition.”

“”If 9/11 happens there again, I want to be the first to die,” said Rauf, who was born in Kuwait and is an naturalized American citizen. “It’s my duty as an American Muslim to stand between you, the American non-Muslim, and the radicals who are trying to attack you.””

Friday’s Wall Street Journal posted an article on the disparity between the reading proficiency level of boys and girls.

The article points out:

“This disparity goes back to 1992, and in some states the percentage of boys proficient in reading is now more than ten points below that of girls. The male-female reading gap is found in every socio-economic and ethnic category, including the children of white, college-educated parents.”

The article also notes that there is no literacy gap between home-schooled boys and girls. So what is going on?

The article points out:

“The appearance of the boy-girl literacy gap happens to coincide with the proliferation of video games and other electronic forms of entertainment over the last decade or two. Boys spend far more time “plugged in” than girls do. Could the reading gap have more to do with competition for boys’ attention than with their supposed inability to focus on anything other than outhouse humor?

“Dr. Robert Weis, a psychology professor at Denison University, confirmed this suspicion in a randomized controlled trial of the effect of video games on academic ability. Boys with video games at home, he found, spend more time playing them than reading, and their academic performance suffers substantially. Hard to believe, isn’t it, but Science has spoken.”

The article concludes that the way to increase boys’ reading ability is to decrease their time on video games. That actually makes perfect sense.

The article also explores the trend in some educational circles to capture the attention of boys by reading ‘grossout’ books. There are a few problems with this. Eventually, we expect these boys to grow up and become gentlemen. If we cater to their ‘grossout’ taste in the interest of teaching them to read, it may not be reasonable to expect them to become gentlemen in the future. The cultural foundation of a child is laid during the first six to ten years. Culturally, what are we teaching them? Our elementary schools are laying the groundwork for what the next generation will be culturally and intellectually. Do we want ‘grossout’ books to be part of the foundation of that generation? We need to be concerned about the coarsening of the culture. Having little boys reading ‘grossout’ books will not help improve the culture.

This article is based on three articles–one from Power Line on Saturday, one from Hot Air on Friday, and one from Big Government on Saturday. The articles deal with the testimony given to the Civil Rights Commission by former Department of Justice voting rights section chief Christopher Coates on Friday.

According to the Power Line article:

“A Justice Department prosecutor defied his superiors by testifying at a U.S. Civil Rights Commission hearing Friday, where he leveled an explosive allegation: top officials in the department gutted a voter intimidation case against a fringe African American militant group because the suspects were black and their alleged victims were white.

“The prosecutor, Christopher Coates, also said the downgrading of the case against the New Black Panther Party was evidence of a Justice Department culture which discouraged “race neutral” enforcement of civil rights laws, frowned on prosecuting minority perpetrators and folded under pressure from black and Latino rights groups. After President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder took office, the culture intensified, Coates told the panel, ultimately leading to his departure as chief of the voting rights section early this year.”

Part of Mr. Coates testimony is posted at Hot Air:

“In the spring of 2009, Ms. King, who had by then been appointed Acting AAG for Civil Rights by the Obama Administration, called me to her office and specifically instructed me that I was not to ask any other applicants whether they would be willing to, in effect, race-neutrally enforce the VRA. Ms. King took offense that I was asking such a question of job applicants and directed me not to ask it because she does not support equal enforcement of the provisions of the VRA and had been highly critical of the filing and prosecution of the Ike Brown case.”

The article at Big Government reports:

“Coates hoped for a change in attitude when Julie Fernandez was appointed by the President to become assistant AG for Civil Rights, but those hopes were dashed when Ms Fernandez held a staff luncheon for the Voting Rights Division and declared that the Obama Administration was only interested in bringing the “traditional” types of section 2 cases that would provide political equality for racial and language minority voters. That, she said, is what we are all about.

“One of the most sacred rights and responsibilities of American citizenship is voting. We are supposed to be guaranteed that every person’s vote is worth as much as every other person’s vote. That guarantee has never been perfect, Blacks weren’t allowed to vote until the 15th amendment in 1870, and women until 1920’s 19th Amendment, but the tradition of the United States has been to aspire toward the concept of “one man, one vote.”

“This past election we took a major step backwards, ACORN, perpetuated voter fraud in at least 14 states to the point where some districts had MORE than 100% of registered voters casting ballots. Ultimately this had little effect on the national results. But it was wide-spread enough to cause concern was enough to erode confidence in the system.”

The politicization of the Justice Department is simply wrong. It totally undermines the U. S. Constutition. It defies the concept of “equal justice under the law.” To prosecute or not prosecute a case based on the race of the people involved is racism, regardless of the race of the people. I would very much like to see justice in this case, but I would also like to see some reporting of the case by the major media. You will notice that I easily found three different articles on the case. The artice at Power LIne details what papers ackowledged the testimony and how much attention they paid to it. The fact that the testimony was generally ignored by the major media should give all of us pause.

The daily outrage in the Washington Examiner on Friday was the spending of more than $50 million of taxpayer dollars to provide clean cooking stoves for developing countries in order “to reduce deaths from smoke inhalation and fight climate change.” This is money to be given to the United Nations for this purpose.

The article stated:

“An official for the United Nations Foundation said that, “You’re going to have to create a thriving cookstove industry that can supply both stoves and fuels that people want and need.””

First, I would like to remind whoever the person is who came up with this bright idea that the United Nations does not have a great track record on handling money. Second of all, there is no concrete evidence that climate change (global warming) is man-made. Third, I would like to point out that the United States has budget problems at home that need to be dealt with before we give $50 million to the United Nations.

In 2008, Paul J.P. Loscocco, a Republican from Holliston, stepped down from his State Senate seat. Carolyn Dykema was elected to that seat with a narrow victory of less than 900 votes (according to Boston.com). This year Carolyn Dykema is running for re-election against Jonathan Loya.

The Clean Sweep Beacon Hill, PAC has endorsed Jonathan Loya, stating:

“Jonathan brings with him ideas that will make voters take notice. Adding these to drive and initiative, he presents a spirit that is sorely lacking on Beacon Hill. He demonstrates a strong mastery of the problems facing both his district and the Commonwealth. In addition to knowing what’s wrong, he brings fresh ideas and enthusiasm for positive action. Nor is Jonathan content to stay with safe topics. The issues he wants to tackle are problems real people experience daily: dirty and unsafe drinking water, inadequate education for our children and over-reliance on teaching to standardized tests to the detriment of individual learning, overbearing taxation, government waste and economic growth.”

Jonathan Loya‘s website also points out that he is a first time candidate who believes in term limits. It also lists his qualifications and his ideas to help make Massachusetts a better place to live and work. He is running as an Independent candidate. When I checked my list of candidates, I did not see a Republican running in this race.

If Washington is broken, Massachusetts is also broken. The only way to fix it is to elect people who are not tied to special interests or who are not intent on becoming wealthy at the expense of the Massachusetts taxpayers. I believe Jonathan Loya is one of those people. If you live in the 8th Middlesex District of Massachusetts, I hope that you will vote for him.

What happens when you let a federal agency keep the fines it levies? Bad things. Posted at the American Thinker today is a chronicle of abuses of power by NOAA (The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration) in their oversight of the fishing industry. NOAA’s OLE (Office of Law Enforcement) has purchased 22 vessels at a cost of $2.7M using funds from fines and seizures. The vessels are used for random boardings of working fishing boats. Probable cause? How quaint. According to the article, fishermen’s fines paid for some $600K of international travel expenses, $500K of which was not covered by NOAA’s OLE policy.

The article states:

“Backup is provided in a scathing July 2010 Inspector General (IG) report on the NOAA law enforcement Asset Forfeiture Fund (AFF), made up of the money realized by fines and forfeitures from fishermen. From January 2005 through June 2009, the AFF received some $96M, spent $49M, and had a balance of $8.4M. My arithmetic suggests $40M is missing. The IG’s report describes NOAA’s management of the AFF as an “abstract concept” and as “susceptible to both error and abuse.” You think?”

I am not sure what the outcome of this investigation will be. The article further points out:

This is an example of the federal government seriously overstepping its bounds. We need to elect a Congress in November that will not only investigate the problem, but also deal with it. I commend the Massachusetts delegation for at least asking for the investigation, but what is Congress willing to do to solve the problem? Generations of honest, hard-working fishermen are being driven out of business by a government that is out of control. That should not happen in a democracy. Let’s elect people in November who respect the U. S. Constitution!

Ted Nugent posted an article in the Washington Times on Thursday entitled, “Freedom versus Shariah”. He opens his article by saying that we really don’t know what the views of moderate Mulsims are. We don’t know if they recognize Israel, support women’s rights, want the Mosque build at a location other than Ground Zero, and respect the rights of others to burn the Koran or draw Mohammad. Generally speaking, they are silent.

The Center for Security Policy assembled a “Team B” and just released a report about the activities of non-moderate Muslims in America. The article in the Washington Times points out:

“The most bone-chilling finding by Team B is that America faces the threat of Islamic Shariah law slowing poisoning our legal system and ultimately destroying it. Shariah is the Islamic doctrine in which Allah rules over everything, including legal, political and military doctrine. Shariah is incompatible with a society of free and thinking people.”

This needs to be shouted from the front-page of every major newspaper in America. Somehow it hasn’t been.

Mr. Nugent further points out:

“Shariah will only be allowed to poison our legal system and culture if we allow it. We should stand steadfast against it, outlaw it and make it known throughout the world that America stands with freedom and that we will not allow it to be compromised out of fear of upsetting Muslims or a false belief that we can coexist with a religious revolution whose goal is to destroy America.”

One of the things I learned about while attending a briefing on terrorism recently was the concept of “abrogation.” This is the concept that the later written verses of the Koran supersede the previous verses. That is why a Muslim can recite a verse to you that says in essence “make friends with the People of The Book (referring to Christians and Jews)” and not mention the verses that come later that say in essence “kill the infidels.” Unfortunately, the latter verses are the one that are recognized as the ‘latest revelation’ and thus more relevant.

We can put our heads in the sand or we can wake up and protect our country. I vote for the latter.

I haven’t studied the specifics of the pledge enough to feel comfortable commenting on it. My comments are on some of the comments made by the Democrats in Congress when it was introduced and on why it was introduced.

If you look at the title of this blog, it shouldn’t be a surprise that for the past few years I have been a registered Republican. I was a Democrat until Jimmy Carter. His Presidency convinced me that I was in the wrong political party. Having said that I am a Republican, I need to also point out that I am a conservative before I am a Republican. The behavior of the Republicans elected to office in the past few election cycles is horrible. They might as well be Democrats. If I wanted bigger government, more spending, more regulation, and higher taxes, I could have voted for the Democrats. I suspect that I am not alone in that feeling.

A few of the Republicans currently in Congress actually have backbones. Some of them are willing to work for smaller government, less regulation, and lower taxes. These are the people who have put together the Pledge to America (see also Paul Ryan’s Roadmap). The Pledge is necessary because the American people no longer trust their elected officials. The Pledge provides a plan that if followed, we can vote for these people again. If the Pledge is not followed, we can vote them out! We could debate for a long time whether the Tea Party has given some Republicans the strength to stand up for what they believe, but it really does not matter. This is the time to fight runaway government!

One of the main Democrat responses to the Pledge is to say that it is not specific enough to be taken seriously. Is this the same Democrat party that said, “We have to pass the healthcare bill in order to find out what is in it” ? Is this the same Democrat party that is not willing to vote on raising taxes for all Americans on January 1 (not extending the Bush tax cuts for everyone) until after the November election? Is this the same Democrat party that does not even have the courage to propose a specific government budget for next year until after the November election? Seems a little hypocritical to me!

Yesterday the Wall Street Journal reported that as the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) expires on October 3rd, Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general for TARP, has submitted his budget request for the coming year. His request is for an increase in his staff from 140 people to 192 people.

“The reason why we’re ramping up is that the amount of fraud that is out there, the amount of case work that we’re doing, has in some cases exceeded our expectations. The cases are very complex … sophisticated white collar cases,” he (Barofsky) said.

“Barofsky declined to talk about the budget request or how much his office is requesting, citing privacy rules governing the submission. But he said it’s natural for investigations to heat up in the years after a program gets under way, as regulators, auditors and others begin to spot red flags.”

Barofsky is opening four branch offices across the country, which he plans to staff with investigators. Meanwhile, the Treasury, which is in the midst of ending TARP, has about 220 people working on the program.

I think it is really great that Mr. Barofsky is planning to investigate fraud in the TARP. I just wonder if increasing his staff by more than one-third when government spending is totally out of control is a reasonable move.

On Tuesday, Israel Today posted a story which partially explains why the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians is so difficult. The story reported that the Palestinian Authority has taken racism to new heights by imposing an automatic death sentence on any local Arab who sells property to a Jew.

According to the article:

“…(public prosecutor Ahmed) Al-Mughani told the Associated Press that the previous interpretation of the law had been too lax. The previous law had given Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas the power to choose whether Arabs who sold land to Jews would be executed or sentenced to life in prison. Abbas has not approved an execution since taking power in 2004, though a number of “traitors” have been killed in acts of “street justice” that went unpunished by the PA.”

Why in the world do we want to create a racist, anti-Semitic state? I would love to see peace in the Middle East, and I would love to see a country of Palestine that was a positive contributor to world peace and to the world economy. What I don’t want to see is America blessing the creation of a state whose sole ambition is to destroy Israel and any Jew it encounters. I really think President Obama need to reevaluate the amount of energy he is spending on Middle East peace and concentrate on some of the problems at home. Until the racism that is enshrined in the government of the Palestinian Authority ends, peace is not possible.

Normally I don’t have a problem with people, PAC’s (Political Action Committees), unions, or corporations making campaign contributions as long as those contributions are made public and done in accordance with the wishes and consent of the people represented by the groups named. I do have a problem, however, with one recent corporate contribution.

Yesterday the Wall Street Journal reported that General Motors has made $90,500 worth of contributions to political campaigns to politicians running in this election cycle. That’s the same General Motors that is majority-owned by the U.S. government. The U. S. government owns approximately roughly 61% of the company.

According to the article:

“GM spokesman Greg Martin said the company stopped making political contributions in spring 2009 to focus on its taxpayer-financed bankruptcy reorganization.

“As we’ve emerged as a new company, we’re not going to sit on the sidelines as our competitors and other industries who have PACs are participating in the political process,” Mr. Martin said. He called GM’s political action committee is “an effective means for our employees to pool their resources and have their collective voice heard.””

Until the company debuts its IPO (expected in November after the election) and again becomes a stockpayer owned corporation, I totally object to the company making political donations. That is, in essence, the government giving money to the people they think should be elected.

The entire buy-out of General Motors, paying unions over preferred stockholders, firing the head of the company, was wrong. This latest wrinkle only aggravates the situation. The Obama Administration needs a Congress that will keep it in check and prevent this sort of thing from happening in the future. The problem is not Wall Street–it is the federal government interferring in the free market–housing, automobiles, medical care, etc. We need to elect a Congress that will stop the intrusive growth of government. Please vote carefully in November.

My sources for this article are National Review Online and nj.com. Something very interesting has happened in New Jersey. I am not sure exactly how this worked, but Governor Christie (my new hero) cut $7.5 million in public funding for Planned Parenthood clinics in the state. Because the state legislature failed to override his veto of their trying to reinstate the cut, Planned Parenthood of Southern New Jersey saw a $160,000 cut in its funds. Because of these cuts, appointments usually held at the Planned Parenthood Cherry Hill clinic will be moved to clinics in Camden, Bellmawr and Edgewater Park, the report said.

I have a few questions on this. Why was the state giving $160,000 to an abortion clinic to begin with? This was not a cut in the money spent on uninsured patients–this was a cut in the public funding for Planned Parenthood abortion clinics. Why, in a time of economic hardship for taxpayers, was public money being used in this way? Abortion is a moral issue and there are many people in the country who oppose abortion unless the life of the mother is truly threatened. These people are taxpayers. Why are their wishes being ignored?